Can an accomplice be held liable as an aider and abettor in a sexual assault case?

Penal Code section 1111 defines an accomplice and provides that "[a] conviction can not be had upon the testimony of an accomplice unless it be corroborated by such other evidence as shall tend to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense; and the corroboration is not sufficient if it merely shows the commission of the offense or the circumstances thereof." Where an accomplice testifies, the trial court must instruct the jury sua sponte that the accomplice's testimony is to be viewed with distrust and that the defendant cannot be convicted on the basis of the accomplice's testimony unless that testimony is corroborated. (People v. Zapien (1993) 4 Cal.4th 929, 982.) No such instruction was requested or given in the instant case.

An accomplice is a person "who is liable to prosecution for the identical offense charged against the defendant on trial in the cause in which the testimony of the accomplice is given." (Pen. Code, 1111.) One is "'liable to prosecution for the identical offense'" if he fits the definition of a principal provided in Penal Code section 31. (People v. Horton (1995) 11 Cal.4th 1068, 1113.) That is, if he directly commits an act constituting an offense, aids and abets commission of the offense or, although not present, advises and encourages its commission, he fits the definition of a principal. (Pen. Code, 31.)

One may be held liable as an aider and abettor when, with knowledge of the perpetrator's criminal purpose, he gives the perpetrator aid or encouragement with the intent of facilitating the perpetrator's commission of the crime. (People v. Champion (1995) 9 Cal.4th 879, 928; People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 560.)